Besides being the title of Zao's latest (and final?) album, I think this applies to far too many Americans of the "Religious Right" stripe. Now, I tend to shy away from labels like that because they are too broad and inaccurately portray a large group of people as single-minded in purpose.
However, you know the person I'm talking about. They are currently terrified of Obama being elected. He's a: terrorist, Socialist, Muslim, who is going to: let Israel get destroyed, the tax rate will go up to 50% to support the jobless, Christians will lose their religious freedoms.
I'll be as polite as I can be. SNAP OUT OF IT! Are you a Christian first or an American first? Think carefully before you answer because that answer will affect how you view the situation.
There is such an immense amount of fear surrounding this election, and its sinful. Simply sinful. Do you trust in God? Honestly, truly trust in God? Because if you do, don't you think He can work in any situation? Don't you think that even if the most horrible things imaginable happen, God will still be God and still be sovereign?
Because the sheer amount of fear out there among certain groups of religious voters doesn't lead me to believe this is what's being taught. The wedding of too many Christian organizations to the Republican party has led us to this point. Its no longer "Trust in God." Its "We need a conservative Supreme Court because if we don't the bad evil liberals will steal away all our freedoms." WHAT?
God works in the world no matter who is in charge. Yes, He does.
If you are someone struggling with fear about Obama getting elected, please, pray about it. Lots. This doesn't mean that you can't disagree with his ideas! That's fine! Good even! I don't care if you want to vote for him or not.
I do care that you stop living in fear. God does not desire His children to fear anything but Him.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
GM & Chrysler
As merger talks occur (but no comment from the companies of course!) I thought I'd let everyone know what this deal is really about.
NPR was talking with an editor at Edmunds and she said it was pretty much so GM can get Chrysler's cash reserves now, and have more leverage with the Feds to get money from them later. This is a high risk/reward situation. If it works GM gets lots of Fed dollars and stays afloat hemorrhaging money for a few more years. If it doesn't....well, I guess I don't need to worry about coming into work.
Talking to our Chrysler rep the other day he had a good analogy for the situation. Here's how it had been explained to him.
"You own a house and are totally upside down in a bad mortgage. Your neighbor has a bigger house, but is in the same situation. Your neighbor goes to the bank to get a mortgage to buy your house, and then proceeds to burn it down for insurance purposes."
That is, in a bit of an oversimplified nutshell, what GM wants to do. GM wants Chrysler's 10-11 billion in cash reserves. But GM also believes that if they acquire Chrysler (which would involve completely gutting Chrysler and probably all but dissolving the company) they would be more likely to get more loans from the Feds.
Talk about a risky move!
The fortunate thing is that GM's investors may not go for the deal. Cerburus is just looking to get their money so I don't think they care what happens to Chrysler if they get their money back.
Chrysler needs to hook up with a company that can benefit them now and for the future. Teaming up with Nissan or Hyundai would seem to benefit Chrysler and both of their companies by giving them a larger dealer base for pretty much free. Even Renault would be a good thing it seems for the same reason.
I just really hope the GM/Chrysler deal never happens because it is merely a ploy to try and weasel money from the government.
NPR was talking with an editor at Edmunds and she said it was pretty much so GM can get Chrysler's cash reserves now, and have more leverage with the Feds to get money from them later. This is a high risk/reward situation. If it works GM gets lots of Fed dollars and stays afloat hemorrhaging money for a few more years. If it doesn't....well, I guess I don't need to worry about coming into work.
Talking to our Chrysler rep the other day he had a good analogy for the situation. Here's how it had been explained to him.
"You own a house and are totally upside down in a bad mortgage. Your neighbor has a bigger house, but is in the same situation. Your neighbor goes to the bank to get a mortgage to buy your house, and then proceeds to burn it down for insurance purposes."
That is, in a bit of an oversimplified nutshell, what GM wants to do. GM wants Chrysler's 10-11 billion in cash reserves. But GM also believes that if they acquire Chrysler (which would involve completely gutting Chrysler and probably all but dissolving the company) they would be more likely to get more loans from the Feds.
Talk about a risky move!
The fortunate thing is that GM's investors may not go for the deal. Cerburus is just looking to get their money so I don't think they care what happens to Chrysler if they get their money back.
Chrysler needs to hook up with a company that can benefit them now and for the future. Teaming up with Nissan or Hyundai would seem to benefit Chrysler and both of their companies by giving them a larger dealer base for pretty much free. Even Renault would be a good thing it seems for the same reason.
I just really hope the GM/Chrysler deal never happens because it is merely a ploy to try and weasel money from the government.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Reese is a prophet
I've been listing to FIF again lately. That's Five Iron Frenzy for those of you not in the know. And you should be in the know. You should be listening to them. Or at least reading their lyrics for some potent social commentary, and plenty of silliness.
American Kryptonite - off "The End is Near" album
Here's my favorite part...
"it was like the manifest destiny all over again, except, instead of taking and consuming everything in their paths for god, they did so with the same fervor and sense of entitlement for their new god...themselves.
American Kryptonite - off "The End is Near" album
Here's my favorite part...
"it was like the manifest destiny all over again, except, instead of taking and consuming everything in their paths for god, they did so with the same fervor and sense of entitlement for their new god...themselves.
Socialism Deux
"schmichael said...
I think you just argued for Obama's tax plan (since we can't exactly mandate what people get paid, all we can do is tax the rich jerks more). :-)While I think Obama is pretty far from being Socialist*, I'm feeling pretty Socialist myself these days. I mean if we're all going to be ruled by a bunch of greedy rich old guys, might as well get to vote on which ones they are."
This is going to be a continuation, musing on, my previous topic and my brother's comment on it.
I agree with Michael's feelings. At heart, I'm a libertarian. I feel that minimal laws and minimal government interference are good things. Unfortunately, I'm also a realist who doesn't believe people are "naturally good." (Note, this does NOT mean I believe we are totally naturally evil, but look where our inclinations head.) I think the current financial crisis should be indication that a "hands off" approach of letting companies police themselves, doesn't work well.
I'm also, because of the current crisis, feeling a bit Socialist. There is apparently zero accountability at the top. You help run a company into the ground, you get bought out and have fun with your millions. You help drive the world economy into the tank, well, since you didn't technically break any laws, you take your money and run.
Now, the problem is, the government is notoriously inefficient at doing things as well. So, I'm not a socialist. I do think we need to find a more middle ground. I don't have a problem with people making lots of money. Especially people like doctors, engineers, etc. Even the financial guys to a certain extent. But, as the market bounces like a yo-yo run by a meth-freak I've pretty much decided they don't know much more than I do in practical terms. (Practical, not theoretical.)
I guess, I'm still in my multi-party mode. We need a couple of Socialists in Congress. We need some libertarians. We need some old school liberals. We need some old-school fiscal conservatives. BADLY!!! We need term limits. BADLY!!!
I suppose what I'm saying in all this is, while I don't think anything is drastically going to change, I don't see how giving the rich more money has helped us out much. I'd be willing to see a little more of the burden get shouldered onto them.
I think you just argued for Obama's tax plan (since we can't exactly mandate what people get paid, all we can do is tax the rich jerks more). :-)While I think Obama is pretty far from being Socialist*, I'm feeling pretty Socialist myself these days. I mean if we're all going to be ruled by a bunch of greedy rich old guys, might as well get to vote on which ones they are."
This is going to be a continuation, musing on, my previous topic and my brother's comment on it.
I agree with Michael's feelings. At heart, I'm a libertarian. I feel that minimal laws and minimal government interference are good things. Unfortunately, I'm also a realist who doesn't believe people are "naturally good." (Note, this does NOT mean I believe we are totally naturally evil, but look where our inclinations head.) I think the current financial crisis should be indication that a "hands off" approach of letting companies police themselves, doesn't work well.
I'm also, because of the current crisis, feeling a bit Socialist. There is apparently zero accountability at the top. You help run a company into the ground, you get bought out and have fun with your millions. You help drive the world economy into the tank, well, since you didn't technically break any laws, you take your money and run.
Now, the problem is, the government is notoriously inefficient at doing things as well. So, I'm not a socialist. I do think we need to find a more middle ground. I don't have a problem with people making lots of money. Especially people like doctors, engineers, etc. Even the financial guys to a certain extent. But, as the market bounces like a yo-yo run by a meth-freak I've pretty much decided they don't know much more than I do in practical terms. (Practical, not theoretical.)
I guess, I'm still in my multi-party mode. We need a couple of Socialists in Congress. We need some libertarians. We need some old school liberals. We need some old-school fiscal conservatives. BADLY!!! We need term limits. BADLY!!!
I suppose what I'm saying in all this is, while I don't think anything is drastically going to change, I don't see how giving the rich more money has helped us out much. I'd be willing to see a little more of the burden get shouldered onto them.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Am I a Socialist/Communist now?
Ok, thankfully, by next Wednesday all this will be done. Well, at least the election part. With any luck 50% of the country will do themselves in after the election and those of us with a brain will still be around. (Note, I hope this no matter who wins. Really, we could use about 50% less idiots right now.)
This rant is in response to the Florida anchorman who asked Joe Biden if Barack Obama was basically Karl Marx. I might be wrong, but wouldn't a little bit of redistribution be a good thing?
I mean, I'm not saying Communism here. But people, the bosses at AIG were standing to get 10s of millions in bonuses after running the company into the ground. Yes AFTER the bailout. Now, the government says, no, they can't have that money, but would those 10s of millions not be better spent investing in jobs for the average American?
They say its too expensive to make stuff here anymore. We can do it cheaper overseas. Well, how many Americans could we employ for $10 million dollars at a living wage? Lets see.
We'll make this simple math and therefore highly inaccurate, but just an idea. Thirty thousand. Multiply by two to county the costs of health insurance, taxes, etc. So, 60,000.
Ten million would be able to pay for 166 people's jobs at $30,000 a year. Before you go all nuts, I understand, that's just salary, but remember, that was just one guy's bonus too.
It is a problem when the top 1% controls 90%+ of the wealth. I'm all for redistributing some of that. Executive pay MUST start being tied to actual company production. Golden parachute plans need to be banned. Things need to start changing at the top.
I'm not saying we need to produce everything here. That would be silly. But we need to have jobs that produce a product. We must. And they need to pay a living wage. I'm not saying $30 an hour to put widget A on widget B. But $15-20/hour, plus health insurance? Yes, I think that could happen.
I don't know. Maybe we'll go Socialist if Obama gets elected. But after the way things have been run, I'm almost welcome to trying something completely different. The system is broken, and if anyone honestly believes the current people we are sending to Washington are going to change things, you're living in a pipe dream.
Until we have actual choice, more than just 2 canidates to chose from, things are not going to change. We need to break the 2 party system and the laws that make dissenting voices impossible to be heard at the polls. It really might be our only hope to stay a leading voice in the world.
This rant is in response to the Florida anchorman who asked Joe Biden if Barack Obama was basically Karl Marx. I might be wrong, but wouldn't a little bit of redistribution be a good thing?
I mean, I'm not saying Communism here. But people, the bosses at AIG were standing to get 10s of millions in bonuses after running the company into the ground. Yes AFTER the bailout. Now, the government says, no, they can't have that money, but would those 10s of millions not be better spent investing in jobs for the average American?
They say its too expensive to make stuff here anymore. We can do it cheaper overseas. Well, how many Americans could we employ for $10 million dollars at a living wage? Lets see.
We'll make this simple math and therefore highly inaccurate, but just an idea. Thirty thousand. Multiply by two to county the costs of health insurance, taxes, etc. So, 60,000.
Ten million would be able to pay for 166 people's jobs at $30,000 a year. Before you go all nuts, I understand, that's just salary, but remember, that was just one guy's bonus too.
It is a problem when the top 1% controls 90%+ of the wealth. I'm all for redistributing some of that. Executive pay MUST start being tied to actual company production. Golden parachute plans need to be banned. Things need to start changing at the top.
I'm not saying we need to produce everything here. That would be silly. But we need to have jobs that produce a product. We must. And they need to pay a living wage. I'm not saying $30 an hour to put widget A on widget B. But $15-20/hour, plus health insurance? Yes, I think that could happen.
I don't know. Maybe we'll go Socialist if Obama gets elected. But after the way things have been run, I'm almost welcome to trying something completely different. The system is broken, and if anyone honestly believes the current people we are sending to Washington are going to change things, you're living in a pipe dream.
Until we have actual choice, more than just 2 canidates to chose from, things are not going to change. We need to break the 2 party system and the laws that make dissenting voices impossible to be heard at the polls. It really might be our only hope to stay a leading voice in the world.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Home Makeovers...
So, the Extreme Homemakeover (or whatever the show is called) is redoing a house just down the street from me. About 4 or 5 blocks away they've demolished the house and have started on the basement.
Its been a bit crazy. I live on one of the main roads in my town, and having it cut off is a bit annoying. But I can live with it for a week.
My parents love the show. My wife does too. I enjoy it, though I don't watch it that often.
The show really strikes my dad, who if he had the time and money would do stuff like that all the time. He and my mom look forward to retirement so when help is needed somewhere they can head out and put the work in. I have cool parents.
Tonight, we're gonna walk down and check it out. Should be pretty interesting.
Its been a bit crazy. I live on one of the main roads in my town, and having it cut off is a bit annoying. But I can live with it for a week.
My parents love the show. My wife does too. I enjoy it, though I don't watch it that often.
The show really strikes my dad, who if he had the time and money would do stuff like that all the time. He and my mom look forward to retirement so when help is needed somewhere they can head out and put the work in. I have cool parents.
Tonight, we're gonna walk down and check it out. Should be pretty interesting.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Palin's & Prada
Well, ok, more than just pants. Pantsuits, makeup, hairdressers, all the stuff necessary to look good during a campaign.
I'm referring to the 150K that the RNC shelled out to clothe Palin (and her family it appears) since she became the VP candidate.
While it appears this is legal, and 150K is a drop in the bucket of campaign financing anymore, it does raise other issues.
Palin is supposed to be "a woman of the people." Someone every American can relate too. While not every American isn't running for office, and that is expensive, I'm not sure how many average Americans can dream of dropping 10k on clothes in 2 months much less 150k.
Granted, that the RNC says it owns the clothes and will donate them to charity after the election. Also, I'm not expecting Palin to go shopping at Wal-mart.
But, when the economy is crunching, the average American scrambling to keep finances above water, and the economy playing a giant role in the race, this is something that doesn't look good.
Is it serious? Not really. But does it look bad? Oh, yeah. And I hate to tell people perception matters as much as substance does.
Is this Palin's fault? Not necessarily. But does it show her inexperience? I think it does. A more savvy political veteran would probably have questioned the need for spending that much (or more likely already had it because of "connections" that goes for both parties) which again leads me to question the RNC's leadership in a "what the heck were they thinking?" scenario. I mean, the RNC has been the kings of this sort of attacking...so they don't think it might happen back?
Oh well, the election is coming soon!
I'm referring to the 150K that the RNC shelled out to clothe Palin (and her family it appears) since she became the VP candidate.
While it appears this is legal, and 150K is a drop in the bucket of campaign financing anymore, it does raise other issues.
Palin is supposed to be "a woman of the people." Someone every American can relate too. While not every American isn't running for office, and that is expensive, I'm not sure how many average Americans can dream of dropping 10k on clothes in 2 months much less 150k.
Granted, that the RNC says it owns the clothes and will donate them to charity after the election. Also, I'm not expecting Palin to go shopping at Wal-mart.
But, when the economy is crunching, the average American scrambling to keep finances above water, and the economy playing a giant role in the race, this is something that doesn't look good.
Is it serious? Not really. But does it look bad? Oh, yeah. And I hate to tell people perception matters as much as substance does.
Is this Palin's fault? Not necessarily. But does it show her inexperience? I think it does. A more savvy political veteran would probably have questioned the need for spending that much (or more likely already had it because of "connections" that goes for both parties) which again leads me to question the RNC's leadership in a "what the heck were they thinking?" scenario. I mean, the RNC has been the kings of this sort of attacking...so they don't think it might happen back?
Oh well, the election is coming soon!
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
GM & Chrysler
Ok, I'm not a business guru, but I don't think you need to be to wonder about the merger talks between Chrysler and GM. Now, nobody knows how far along the merger talks are, and it was mentioned today that they have "slowed" because of "investor skepticism," but there still are talks of sorts.
My question is...why? Now, the simple answer is GM needs cash, Chrysler has cash. Ok, so I understand that.
Beyond the cash, what do the companies have to offer? Both have far too much production capacity. They both have line-ups that are bloated with trucks and SUVs and are trying to rapidly change that. Both have far too many dealerships. Both have too many cross-brand vehicles. (That's a matter of opinion, but I think they do.)
They are two companies with the same problems. Both are coming out with more hybrid vehicles. I for one am excited by our 5.7Hemi hybrid, which (in theory) gets our Durango/Aspens up to around mid 20MPGs. Both are slashing production as much as they can. Both would be happy to see about 1/3 of their dealerships consolidate or go under. (Rough estimate. Probably varies around the country, but I would think that 1/4 to 1/3 could go and make the parent companies happy.)
I don't know about GM, but for Chrysler I would think merging or partnering with a Nissan or Hyundai would make FAR more sense. Or even Renault. I don't know as much about Renault. Both Hyundai and Nissan would benefit from increased exposure, and Chrysler would gain from smaller more fuel efficient vehicles.
Again, I don't claim tons of business knowledge, but at least on the surface, a merger between two struggling companies with many of the same problems seems silly.
My question is...why? Now, the simple answer is GM needs cash, Chrysler has cash. Ok, so I understand that.
Beyond the cash, what do the companies have to offer? Both have far too much production capacity. They both have line-ups that are bloated with trucks and SUVs and are trying to rapidly change that. Both have far too many dealerships. Both have too many cross-brand vehicles. (That's a matter of opinion, but I think they do.)
They are two companies with the same problems. Both are coming out with more hybrid vehicles. I for one am excited by our 5.7Hemi hybrid, which (in theory) gets our Durango/Aspens up to around mid 20MPGs. Both are slashing production as much as they can. Both would be happy to see about 1/3 of their dealerships consolidate or go under. (Rough estimate. Probably varies around the country, but I would think that 1/4 to 1/3 could go and make the parent companies happy.)
I don't know about GM, but for Chrysler I would think merging or partnering with a Nissan or Hyundai would make FAR more sense. Or even Renault. I don't know as much about Renault. Both Hyundai and Nissan would benefit from increased exposure, and Chrysler would gain from smaller more fuel efficient vehicles.
Again, I don't claim tons of business knowledge, but at least on the surface, a merger between two struggling companies with many of the same problems seems silly.
Juggling Nukes with My Pants on Fire
Tatsuya Ishida has a direct line to God I think. Sorta like the Pope. Trust me on this.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Bully for Colin Powell
Powell coming out for Obama was big this weekend. I don't know if it will matter in the race much, but his comments on how disgusted he is with the Republican party leadership were great. Especially about the fear-mongering concerning Muslims.
Regardless of what apologists try and say, Islam is not a religion of peace, only. Mohammed himself led an army, and Islam has been spread with the sword, and it isn't a huge stretch to see how the Koran supports that.
This isn't to say Christianity hasn't done the same thing, but Christ, then central figure of Christianity, was pretty adamant in his views on violence. So, while the faiths share many stories, beliefs, and show similarities, they have that one large difference.
This does NOT mean that all Muslims are jihadists in the modern sense of the word. They don't all want us (non-Muslims) to die in holy war and they aren't all sleepers for terrorist organizations. If you believe they are, you're crazy, and I feel bad because living that sort of fear can't be healthy.
It also doesn't mean that there aren't Muslims around the world that want to kill us. There are. They are the extreme of their religion, but they do exist, and they give all Muslims a bad name.
Islam is designed to be a political religion. Christianity isn't. Massive differences between the two, but we can live in peace and not fear each other.
I suppose what I'm saying with all this, Christians, stop fearing Muslims just because they are Muslim. Trust in the Lord and show his love. Isn't that really all that's required?
Regardless of what apologists try and say, Islam is not a religion of peace, only. Mohammed himself led an army, and Islam has been spread with the sword, and it isn't a huge stretch to see how the Koran supports that.
This isn't to say Christianity hasn't done the same thing, but Christ, then central figure of Christianity, was pretty adamant in his views on violence. So, while the faiths share many stories, beliefs, and show similarities, they have that one large difference.
This does NOT mean that all Muslims are jihadists in the modern sense of the word. They don't all want us (non-Muslims) to die in holy war and they aren't all sleepers for terrorist organizations. If you believe they are, you're crazy, and I feel bad because living that sort of fear can't be healthy.
It also doesn't mean that there aren't Muslims around the world that want to kill us. There are. They are the extreme of their religion, but they do exist, and they give all Muslims a bad name.
Islam is designed to be a political religion. Christianity isn't. Massive differences between the two, but we can live in peace and not fear each other.
I suppose what I'm saying with all this, Christians, stop fearing Muslims just because they are Muslim. Trust in the Lord and show his love. Isn't that really all that's required?
Its spreading...
Least I'm not the only one who sees parallels....
here & here I loves me some Sinfest...
Also, I got the RAM installed in my Linux box. I've sorta figured out how to use it. I mean, the basic programs I can use fine. But I still haven't figured out how to use the packages that don't create their own little icons on my menu tree.
I'll work on it. I don't know if I have to install them again...or compile them, or what. Oh well, FreeCiv works and I've been wasting FAR too much time on that right now. Ahh, I love me Civ games.
here & here I loves me some Sinfest...
Also, I got the RAM installed in my Linux box. I've sorta figured out how to use it. I mean, the basic programs I can use fine. But I still haven't figured out how to use the packages that don't create their own little icons on my menu tree.
I'll work on it. I don't know if I have to install them again...or compile them, or what. Oh well, FreeCiv works and I've been wasting FAR too much time on that right now. Ahh, I love me Civ games.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
New Levels of Geekiness
Well, I've expanded my geekiness further. As if video games, RPGs, fantasy/sci fi books and movies weren't enough, I loaded Linux on a computer last night.
Now, granted, it only ups my geek quotient a little because I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I'M DOING!
But I did it.
I acquired an older P4 Dell. Its a single core 2ghz with, currently 256meg of RAM. (1 gig is on its way from Tiger Direct)
I tried loading the Ubuntu my brother gave me. The lastest version didn't even load, so I tried the 6.06 release he gave me a few years back. 45 minutes into the installation I was on step 2 "select your time zone." Apparently it required a bit more RAM than I have.
So asking some of my Star Pirates buddies one of them, a sys admin, suggested I try Vector, a Linux distro that is aimed at older machines. It only took 2 times to install, and I think the first time it installed fine, but I selected the wrong viewing mode because I couldn't see anything on the screen.
So I got it installed, and working, and I have realized, I don't know how to use Linux at all. I'd fiddled with Ubuntu a little, tiny bit before. But Ubuntu is Linux for idiots (or everyone) apparently because it's REALLY simple to use. Vector is easy too, but I don't know any Linux commands, so I've installed a couple programs (at least I THINK I have) but I don't know how to execute them yet.
Thankfully I've found a nice little Linux/Unix tutorial online, and am reading up on it. Maybe I'll at least be able to get some programs installed and working. We'll see. If nothing else its fun to fiddle around with a computer again. WindowsXP is a nice OS, Vista works. (I hate it because it sucks up SO much system resource, especially graphics, that if you don't have a decent graphics card, forget playing any game made within the last few years.) But, MS products are also not all that much fun to use. I mean, they work, but I dunno. I sort of am looking forward to working with an OS that I actually have to learn how to use. And who knows, my brother keeps saying Python is the greatest thing since Perl, so maybe I'll program too! (I only sort of know what those things are...but xkcd talks about them sometimes....
Now, granted, it only ups my geek quotient a little because I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I'M DOING!
But I did it.
I acquired an older P4 Dell. Its a single core 2ghz with, currently 256meg of RAM. (1 gig is on its way from Tiger Direct)
I tried loading the Ubuntu my brother gave me. The lastest version didn't even load, so I tried the 6.06 release he gave me a few years back. 45 minutes into the installation I was on step 2 "select your time zone." Apparently it required a bit more RAM than I have.
So asking some of my Star Pirates buddies one of them, a sys admin, suggested I try Vector, a Linux distro that is aimed at older machines. It only took 2 times to install, and I think the first time it installed fine, but I selected the wrong viewing mode because I couldn't see anything on the screen.
So I got it installed, and working, and I have realized, I don't know how to use Linux at all. I'd fiddled with Ubuntu a little, tiny bit before. But Ubuntu is Linux for idiots (or everyone) apparently because it's REALLY simple to use. Vector is easy too, but I don't know any Linux commands, so I've installed a couple programs (at least I THINK I have) but I don't know how to execute them yet.
Thankfully I've found a nice little Linux/Unix tutorial online, and am reading up on it. Maybe I'll at least be able to get some programs installed and working. We'll see. If nothing else its fun to fiddle around with a computer again. WindowsXP is a nice OS, Vista works. (I hate it because it sucks up SO much system resource, especially graphics, that if you don't have a decent graphics card, forget playing any game made within the last few years.) But, MS products are also not all that much fun to use. I mean, they work, but I dunno. I sort of am looking forward to working with an OS that I actually have to learn how to use. And who knows, my brother keeps saying Python is the greatest thing since Perl, so maybe I'll program too! (I only sort of know what those things are...but xkcd talks about them sometimes....
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Cats
I love cats. I suppose there are million more important things to think on than cats right now, but well, I love cats! I'm reading a webcomic right now, Megatokyo, and a cat has been in it lately and it got me thinking about my crazy kitty.
My wifey and I have a wonderful, if insane, cat named Reesie (she looks like Reese's Pieces). She's sweet, lovable, smart and crazy.
This morning, starting at 4:55, it was time for sprints throughout the house.
Reesie is not a large cat, maybe 12-13 lbs at the most, but she can THUNDER through the house. And of course, insane running through the house would not be complete without crashing into things to make MORE noise. This is followed by loud, furious, scratching on her scratch board, and off for another round of sprints.
She's crazy, but cuddly and lovable. She's a sweet kitty and I wouldn't trade her for any other kitty out there!
My wifey and I have a wonderful, if insane, cat named Reesie (she looks like Reese's Pieces). She's sweet, lovable, smart and crazy.
This morning, starting at 4:55, it was time for sprints throughout the house.
Reesie is not a large cat, maybe 12-13 lbs at the most, but she can THUNDER through the house. And of course, insane running through the house would not be complete without crashing into things to make MORE noise. This is followed by loud, furious, scratching on her scratch board, and off for another round of sprints.
She's crazy, but cuddly and lovable. She's a sweet kitty and I wouldn't trade her for any other kitty out there!
Monday, October 13, 2008
Saturday, October 11, 2008
More Great Links
What can I say about the "culture of hate" being promoted by the Republicans right now that this doesn't already say?
Or here?
Thanks to Brian McLaren for these links. It shows the McCain is still a decent human being and that he is slowly realizing what the road he chose to take is leading him towards.
If McCain 2000 was running, I'd vote for him in a second. He's still in there, but he sold his sold his soul to the current Republican party and their politics of fear and hatred. This is NOT Christian and not something Christians should support.
Oh, and in that 2nd article, Congressman Ray Lahood got it RIGHT-
'Veteran Republican Congressman Ray LaHood criticized Sarah Palin in particular, saying her rhetoric did not "befit the office she's running for."'
Thanks Ray! Wanted to point out something you got right!
Or here?
Thanks to Brian McLaren for these links. It shows the McCain is still a decent human being and that he is slowly realizing what the road he chose to take is leading him towards.
If McCain 2000 was running, I'd vote for him in a second. He's still in there, but he sold his sold his soul to the current Republican party and their politics of fear and hatred. This is NOT Christian and not something Christians should support.
Oh, and in that 2nd article, Congressman Ray Lahood got it RIGHT-
'Veteran Republican Congressman Ray LaHood criticized Sarah Palin in particular, saying her rhetoric did not "befit the office she's running for."'
Thanks Ray! Wanted to point out something you got right!
Friday, October 10, 2008
LaHood is wrong.
Reading yesterday's paper, and our local congressman, Ray Lahood, was speaking to Jr. High students at a local Catholic school a couple days back. Mr. Lahood, at one time a civics teacher, was saying how the electoral college is outdated and should be done away with in favor of a popular vote.
His reasoning is that right now, some people's votes effectively "don't count."
I agree. I agree the current system is not working. But I don't think merely going to a straight popular vote is right either. The electoral college is fine, just get rid of the "winner take all" aspect of it. Break it down to percentages.
This would also allow 3rd parties a chance to at least get a showing in national elections.
If 60% of Illinoisians who vote vote for Obama he gets 60% of our electoral votes. And on down the line. This will help keep in check ballot stuffing, which I'm sorry, would inevitably occur if it were a straight popular vote.
The electoral college isn't broken, the distribution of those votes is.
His reasoning is that right now, some people's votes effectively "don't count."
I agree. I agree the current system is not working. But I don't think merely going to a straight popular vote is right either. The electoral college is fine, just get rid of the "winner take all" aspect of it. Break it down to percentages.
This would also allow 3rd parties a chance to at least get a showing in national elections.
If 60% of Illinoisians who vote vote for Obama he gets 60% of our electoral votes. And on down the line. This will help keep in check ballot stuffing, which I'm sorry, would inevitably occur if it were a straight popular vote.
The electoral college isn't broken, the distribution of those votes is.
A couple quick things
Short post today. Taking certification posts for work. Got these links from Brian McLaren's blog.
Pro-life and Obama? It can be!
Again, do I think Obama is the nation's savior? No. He still may not get my vote. I do know McCain/Palin will NOT be getting my vote.
Evangelical Christians desperately need to look past simplistic voting on issues such as abortion and gay marriage to the whole picture. Please. You might still come to the conclusion that the Republican platform is right. (I agree with them on some things.) I even more sincerely hope you come to the conclusion that the current system is broken and want to work to change it.
Pro-life and Obama? It can be!
Again, do I think Obama is the nation's savior? No. He still may not get my vote. I do know McCain/Palin will NOT be getting my vote.
Evangelical Christians desperately need to look past simplistic voting on issues such as abortion and gay marriage to the whole picture. Please. You might still come to the conclusion that the Republican platform is right. (I agree with them on some things.) I even more sincerely hope you come to the conclusion that the current system is broken and want to work to change it.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
So Fragile
The father of one of my friend's died. I didn't know him. He'd had cancer I guess and this wasn't exactly "unexpected." But I don't see how that really makes it much better for my friend.
I can't imagine losing my father. My heart goes out to Tom and his family. They are in my thoughts and prayers.
Life is such a fleeting thing, I really need to appreciate more the time I have and the people God has surrounded me with more.
I can't imagine losing my father. My heart goes out to Tom and his family. They are in my thoughts and prayers.
Life is such a fleeting thing, I really need to appreciate more the time I have and the people God has surrounded me with more.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
"Debate" "winner"
Yes, I put both words in quotes because there really wasn't a debate and how you pick a "winner" in those I'm not sure. However, throwing my hat in the ring, here it goes.
I didn't watch the debate. Oh, it was on in the background and I was listening some, but I wasn't following closely hanging on every word.
That said, I would agree that Obama "won." Why? Well, he didn't tell as many lies, untruths, distortions, call them what you will. Does that mean he didn't distort any of McCain's positions or put out numbers that aren't accurate? No. But he sure didn't do it as often as McCain.
It is sad. McCain's whole strategy seems to have become "Let's hope people never look at www.factcheck.org and get scared about Obama!" Really, that seemed to be it. The bald lie he said about how Obama was going to "fine" small businesses for not giving their employees health insurance was amazing! And, I give credit to Brokaw for not being partisan by not really letting Obama respond, since that was how the stupid rules were set up. (How you can debate without responding to your opponent's positions, especially when they have incorrectly characterized your's I'm not sure.)
So, in my world Obama was the winner. McCain came across, to me, as pandering, petty, and generally not a happy person (did you see him in the background sometimes?) while Obama was composed and poised and did pretty well for himself.
I don't see how anyone after a year and a half of this schlock can still be "undecided" and if they are I don't see how this debate would change things. But it went well for Obama, only a month to go!
I didn't watch the debate. Oh, it was on in the background and I was listening some, but I wasn't following closely hanging on every word.
That said, I would agree that Obama "won." Why? Well, he didn't tell as many lies, untruths, distortions, call them what you will. Does that mean he didn't distort any of McCain's positions or put out numbers that aren't accurate? No. But he sure didn't do it as often as McCain.
It is sad. McCain's whole strategy seems to have become "Let's hope people never look at www.factcheck.org and get scared about Obama!" Really, that seemed to be it. The bald lie he said about how Obama was going to "fine" small businesses for not giving their employees health insurance was amazing! And, I give credit to Brokaw for not being partisan by not really letting Obama respond, since that was how the stupid rules were set up. (How you can debate without responding to your opponent's positions, especially when they have incorrectly characterized your's I'm not sure.)
So, in my world Obama was the winner. McCain came across, to me, as pandering, petty, and generally not a happy person (did you see him in the background sometimes?) while Obama was composed and poised and did pretty well for himself.
I don't see how anyone after a year and a half of this schlock can still be "undecided" and if they are I don't see how this debate would change things. But it went well for Obama, only a month to go!
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Russia for President!
In light of the heaviness, I thought that I'd give an outside the box idea on the financial crisis and what we can do to solve it this election year.
Everybody vote Russian! Russian you say? Yes, Russian. Putin and his little lapdog Medvedev for ruler of the USA! A bad idea? Think about it.
What did Putin do to the billionaire owner of the (now) Russian oil company? Hit him with trumped up charges, sent him to jail and nationalized the company! Think that guy got a golden parachute? Not likely!
Upset with the fat cats that have destroyed your retirement fund? Vote Russian! Its assured that Putin and Medvedev would come in and take care of the problem. Sure, it might not be so good for the guys at the top, but I say screw them! Since when did they care about us? I mean really, for the average American right now we're pretty politically handicapped anyway, why not give it over to a totalitarian "democracy?" Can it be any worse?
Vote Russian this November and revel in the glory of ages past! No more do we have to hide in shame our disgraceful actions in Souteast Asia or South America! It was all part of a glorious battle for supremecy, won by our new leaders!
Vote Russian and enjoy all the benefits of a dictatorship, while still being able to have some choices in your life. Like, do you want Stoli or Smirnoff?
Putin and Medvedev! They will fix this mess, or at least shoot some of those responsible. I mean, reeducate. Yeah, reeducate with a 7.62mm to the skull.....
Everybody vote Russian! Russian you say? Yes, Russian. Putin and his little lapdog Medvedev for ruler of the USA! A bad idea? Think about it.
What did Putin do to the billionaire owner of the (now) Russian oil company? Hit him with trumped up charges, sent him to jail and nationalized the company! Think that guy got a golden parachute? Not likely!
Upset with the fat cats that have destroyed your retirement fund? Vote Russian! Its assured that Putin and Medvedev would come in and take care of the problem. Sure, it might not be so good for the guys at the top, but I say screw them! Since when did they care about us? I mean really, for the average American right now we're pretty politically handicapped anyway, why not give it over to a totalitarian "democracy?" Can it be any worse?
Vote Russian this November and revel in the glory of ages past! No more do we have to hide in shame our disgraceful actions in Souteast Asia or South America! It was all part of a glorious battle for supremecy, won by our new leaders!
Vote Russian and enjoy all the benefits of a dictatorship, while still being able to have some choices in your life. Like, do you want Stoli or Smirnoff?
Putin and Medvedev! They will fix this mess, or at least shoot some of those responsible. I mean, reeducate. Yeah, reeducate with a 7.62mm to the skull.....
Monday, October 6, 2008
It'll get worse before it gets better...
Yes folks, this campaign and economy are going to get much worse before it gets any better. Thank God the campaign only has a month left. The economy we're going to be stuck with for much much longer.
John McCain has given up in Michigan, citing the bad economy and his campaign's dwindling funds as reasons. He can now focus more heavily on other "must win" states such as Ohio.
Good luck with that John. If you're conceding Michigan because the spiraling economic climate is turning voters against you there, I don't think you'll have much more luck in Ohio. I might be wrong, but I don't see that changing. These economic woes have been building for years, but for 6 of the last 8 of those years the Republicans controlled both the legislative and executive branches. Oh, and remember that under Clinton (who carries some culpability as well) the Republicans had plenty of legislative power as well.
So, if you're McCain, you have to be concerned at this point. Who besides the party faithful are going to vote for you? What would lead anyone to think that the party you represent, the ideals you stand for, are good for the country? This is not because I think Obama and the Democrats have all the answers, I don't think they do. But it is obvious the Republicans have no answers at all.
Remember the quote "It's the economy, stupid?" Well, that's true again! And the stupid government with their stupid bailout have assured us that the American people will be paying and paying for years.
Does this mean I think a "bailout" wasn't necessary? No, I think something did need to be done to shore up the banks. Having one bank after another fail would be bad. Giving billions to people who already screwed up once, that's bad too.
At this point, I really don't know what the American people are to do. I suppose I could hope they will realize the 2 party system is failing this country. But they won't. I suppose I could hope they could realize that we desparately need term limits on our Congresspersons and a ban on working as a lobbyist for 10 years after leaving office. But they won't.
Why won't they? Because the parties won't let those discussions arise. They will put politics over the people and the people aren't smart enough to realize this. Where is the public outcry about the lack of true choice in our political system? Where are the news stories digging into how both the Republican and Democratic parties work together to insure that legitimate contending parties don't arise? You think it doesn't happen?
It takes far more petition signatures to get "independant" or "new party" canidates on the ballot. Don't believe me? Check out this, which breaks down the numbers necessary to get a candidate on the ballot. Now, I realize, we can't have 30 parties running for one seat. But it would be hard for lots of the little parties to get the 600 signatures anyway. What's wrong with have 5 people running? Is that going to break us? No. It wouldn't.
How does all this, McCain, the economy, third party ranting tie together? Its simple. The current system is broken. It is broken by the people we have entrusted to work within it. Republican or Democrat, it shouldn't matter. If you love your country you should want it's political system to work. It isn't working now. It is breaking our economy, our freedom, and many of the ideals America was founded on.
It's only going to happen if the people stand up and cry out. Vote for your party, that's fine. But let's get some real choice out there. Please?
John McCain has given up in Michigan, citing the bad economy and his campaign's dwindling funds as reasons. He can now focus more heavily on other "must win" states such as Ohio.
Good luck with that John. If you're conceding Michigan because the spiraling economic climate is turning voters against you there, I don't think you'll have much more luck in Ohio. I might be wrong, but I don't see that changing. These economic woes have been building for years, but for 6 of the last 8 of those years the Republicans controlled both the legislative and executive branches. Oh, and remember that under Clinton (who carries some culpability as well) the Republicans had plenty of legislative power as well.
So, if you're McCain, you have to be concerned at this point. Who besides the party faithful are going to vote for you? What would lead anyone to think that the party you represent, the ideals you stand for, are good for the country? This is not because I think Obama and the Democrats have all the answers, I don't think they do. But it is obvious the Republicans have no answers at all.
Remember the quote "It's the economy, stupid?" Well, that's true again! And the stupid government with their stupid bailout have assured us that the American people will be paying and paying for years.
Does this mean I think a "bailout" wasn't necessary? No, I think something did need to be done to shore up the banks. Having one bank after another fail would be bad. Giving billions to people who already screwed up once, that's bad too.
At this point, I really don't know what the American people are to do. I suppose I could hope they will realize the 2 party system is failing this country. But they won't. I suppose I could hope they could realize that we desparately need term limits on our Congresspersons and a ban on working as a lobbyist for 10 years after leaving office. But they won't.
Why won't they? Because the parties won't let those discussions arise. They will put politics over the people and the people aren't smart enough to realize this. Where is the public outcry about the lack of true choice in our political system? Where are the news stories digging into how both the Republican and Democratic parties work together to insure that legitimate contending parties don't arise? You think it doesn't happen?
It takes far more petition signatures to get "independant" or "new party" canidates on the ballot. Don't believe me? Check out this, which breaks down the numbers necessary to get a candidate on the ballot. Now, I realize, we can't have 30 parties running for one seat. But it would be hard for lots of the little parties to get the 600 signatures anyway. What's wrong with have 5 people running? Is that going to break us? No. It wouldn't.
How does all this, McCain, the economy, third party ranting tie together? Its simple. The current system is broken. It is broken by the people we have entrusted to work within it. Republican or Democrat, it shouldn't matter. If you love your country you should want it's political system to work. It isn't working now. It is breaking our economy, our freedom, and many of the ideals America was founded on.
It's only going to happen if the people stand up and cry out. Vote for your party, that's fine. But let's get some real choice out there. Please?
Friday, October 3, 2008
Communism doesn't work....
Continuing the greed theme, I just want to preface this with, I am not a communist nor a socialist. I don't know how you classify me politically, but I don't hold to any single political ideology.
As the financial sector continues to crumble back to normality, because lets face it, it grew so much do to bad loans, this is a good time for Christians to evaluate how they use their money. So much of this is coming out of the housing sector's bubble bursting its not even funny.
Making money and having money is not inherently evil. Dallas Willard in his "Spirt of the Disciplines" discusses this at length and shows how Christians should use their faith to manage money not just personally, but commercially as well.
So here's a proposition. What if Christian business owners really, I mean REALLY, thought about what fair wages were. If you own a business, and make, your salary, 100k a year, and your employees make 20k a year, is that right? Now I'm not saying you and your employees should all make the same amount. But I am saying, is this fair?
There can be lots of factors involved, so no sweeping pronouncements should be made. But we need to start thinking in this country about how we use and distribute our money. Does a 4 person family need a 3000+ square foot house? Really?
Do owners need to make 5 and 6 times what their employees do? Or CEOs 300-500 times? This is not a condemnation of wealth. But far too often, people only think of themselves, not their workers.
Who is going to provide affordable healthcare for workers who don't make much money? I understand its very expensive, but so is national healthcare.
My mind is racing too much to post clearly right now, but I suppose the inconsistencies just frustrate me. It is time to start looking at equitable compensation. Equitable does not mean equal, but it does mean fair. And I believe it can be done if we Christians start to adopt a Christ-like model of wealth distribution. It doesn't mean we all have to be poor. It does mean we need to look for ways to actively help the poor that aren't just handouts.
As the financial sector continues to crumble back to normality, because lets face it, it grew so much do to bad loans, this is a good time for Christians to evaluate how they use their money. So much of this is coming out of the housing sector's bubble bursting its not even funny.
Making money and having money is not inherently evil. Dallas Willard in his "Spirt of the Disciplines" discusses this at length and shows how Christians should use their faith to manage money not just personally, but commercially as well.
So here's a proposition. What if Christian business owners really, I mean REALLY, thought about what fair wages were. If you own a business, and make, your salary, 100k a year, and your employees make 20k a year, is that right? Now I'm not saying you and your employees should all make the same amount. But I am saying, is this fair?
There can be lots of factors involved, so no sweeping pronouncements should be made. But we need to start thinking in this country about how we use and distribute our money. Does a 4 person family need a 3000+ square foot house? Really?
Do owners need to make 5 and 6 times what their employees do? Or CEOs 300-500 times? This is not a condemnation of wealth. But far too often, people only think of themselves, not their workers.
Who is going to provide affordable healthcare for workers who don't make much money? I understand its very expensive, but so is national healthcare.
My mind is racing too much to post clearly right now, but I suppose the inconsistencies just frustrate me. It is time to start looking at equitable compensation. Equitable does not mean equal, but it does mean fair. And I believe it can be done if we Christians start to adopt a Christ-like model of wealth distribution. It doesn't mean we all have to be poor. It does mean we need to look for ways to actively help the poor that aren't just handouts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)